JUDGMENT By the Court.—Heard counsel for the petitioners and the learned AGA. 2. The petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 claim to be major and have married out of their love and affection. Petitioner Nos. 3 to 9 are relative and friends of petitioner No. 2. An FIR has been lodged under Sections 363 and 366 IPC which has been registered as case crime No. 689 of 2011, under Sections 363 and 366 IPC, P.S. Govind Nagar District Kanpur Nagar. 3. The petitioners have filed this writ petition for quashing the FIR dated 10.9.2011, lodged by respondent No. 4 in case crime No. 689 of 2011, under Sections 363 and 366 IPC P.S. Govind Nagar District Kanpur Nagar and for issuance of a mandamus directing respondent No. 2 and his subordinate officers neither to arrest the petitioners nor harass them in pursuance of the aforesaid FIR. 4. Petitioner No. 1 Smt. Sonam Pandey and petitioner No. 2 Raghvendra Mishra are present in Court and have been identified by their counsel. 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioner No. 1 has married with petitioner No. 2 out of her own free will and both are majors, hence, the respondents may be directed not to harass or take any coercive action in any manner against the petitioners and also not to interfere in the peaceful living of the petitioners as husband and wife. 6. The Apex Court in the case of D. Velusamy v. D. Patchaiammal, (2010) 10 SCC 469 , has even recognized live-in-relationship between a man and woman in the nature of marriage. 7. In the case of Lata Singh v. State of U.P., 2006 ALD (CRI)-2-230, the Apex Court has held that- “ if any boy or girl who is a major undergoes inter-caste or inter religious marriages with a woman or man, who is major, the couple will not be harassed by anyone nor subjected to threats or acts of violence and anyone who gives such threats or harasses or commits acts of violence either himself or at his instigation, is taken to task by instituting criminal proceedings by the police against such persons and further stern action is taken against such persons as provided by law. The Apex Court further held that the police at all the concerned places should ensure that neither the petitioner nor her husband nor any relatives of the petitioners husband are harassed or threatened nor any acts of violence are committed against them. If anybody is found doing so, he should be proceeded against sternly in accordance with law by the authorities concerned.” 8. In Writ Petition No. 28455 of 2008, Smt. Priya and another v. State of U.P. and others, the Court held that- “A large number of such cases are coming to High Court claiming protection of life and liberty and praying for a direction to the police authorities to protect them from harassment under Article 226 of the Constitution. The number of such cases ranges from 3 to 20 cases per day. Most of such cases are based on no basis. The question is how many of the police force can be spared for protection of such persons ? The law provides that if the girl and the boy are major and after marriage they are being harassed, they can take recourse to procedure provided in law, i.e., they can move the S.S.P. of the district and lodge complaint and let the police after investigation submit its report, but it is seen that in order to stall investigation they directly approach the High Court seeking protection from alleged harassment by their parents and the police. If such be the case the police is to be brought in the dock but the High Court cannot be treated as a Marriage Bureau certifying the marriage and directing the authorities not to investigate the F.I.Rs. or the complaints filed by the parties by directing “to keep their hand off” in the garb of “claimed harassment” by respondents. ———————————————————— —— If the petitioners are major, they can lead their happy married life. In such cases where parties are major and have married with their own sweet will but are being harassed, they should approach the police authorities with proof of their age and their statements. In case there is no proof of age, then they may approach the appropriate authority for determination of their age on the basis of medical examination. In any case, it is expected of every citizen that he will cooperate in investigation and not stall it by directly coming to High Court. In case there is no proof of age, then they may approach the appropriate authority for determination of their age on the basis of medical examination. In any case, it is expected of every citizen that he will cooperate in investigation and not stall it by directly coming to High Court. Apprehension of harassment is not a cause of action to provide protection to world at large. Article 226 should be sparingly used in appropriate rarest cases depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case. This Court is not inclined to interfere in such matters in its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution at this stage.” 9. Question of proof of age of the petitioners who are married cannot be examined by this Court as this is a question of investigation and medical examination, they have to approach the appropriate authority for determination of their age. 10. There are two facets of the society in the marriage of such boys and girls who marry against wishes of their parents. One facet is where the parents cut off their relations from the young couple and wash away their hands from such happening of marriage as spectator, instead of supporting the couple who do require their moral support initially while entering into the married life. The other facet is where the parents are unable to accept the idea that their child has grown and is major and that he is entitled in law to marry a spouse of his own choice. The parents in such a case are so perturbed that as to how the society will react that they not only lodged an FIR against their own flesh and blood who have married but sometimes also take steps further to eliminate them in the name of honour killing. The law has to extend protection in the manner and no harm befalls due to wrath of the parents who have either married in their own caste or out side the caste. Now the society has changed with the need and time. It is accepting not only inter-caste marriage but also live-in-relationship. FIRs. are being used as weapon by the parents to satisfy their ego and provide show case in the society that they do not accept such relationship. This does not appear to be fair as on becoming major a boy or girl is entitled to marry. 11. It is accepting not only inter-caste marriage but also live-in-relationship. FIRs. are being used as weapon by the parents to satisfy their ego and provide show case in the society that they do not accept such relationship. This does not appear to be fair as on becoming major a boy or girl is entitled to marry. 11. We are living in free India and are governed by the Constitution of India. We are not living in those primitive days where the head of the family used to rule the roost and the marriages were performed according to his will. The Apex Court in the case of B. Velusamy (supra) has also taken note of the changed society and has observed in paragraphs 34 and 35 of the judgment thus : “ 34. In feudal society sexual relationship between man and woman outside marriage was totally taboo and regarded with disgust and horror, as depicted in Leo Tolstoy's novel Anna Karenina, Gustave Flaubert's novel Madame Bovary and the novels of the great Bengali writer Sharat Chandra Chattopadhyaya. 35. However, Indian society is changing, and this change has been reflected and recognized by Parliament by enacting the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. 12. Reference in this regard may also be had to the love happened between Anar Kali and Salim in Mugal era. We observe with happiness that society has changed a lot since those days. 13. In the facts and circumstances of this case and for all the reasons stated above, this petition is disposed of with directions to the respondent authorities not to take any coercive action against the petitioners Smt. Sonam Pandey, Raghvendra Mishra, Vishnu Kant Mishra, Smt. Urmila Devi, Puneet Awasthi, Swati Awasthi, Atul Mishra, Manisha Mishra and Akash Verma or arrest them till submission of report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. in case crime No. 689 of 2011, under Sections 363 and 366 IPC, P.S. Govind Nagar District Kanpur Nagar. ——————